Re: [PATCH] implement SO_ACCEPTCONN in pflocal

2013-09-07 Thread Samuel Thibault
Pino Toscano, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 18:47:23 +0200, a écrit : > + case SO_ACCEPTCONN: > + assert (*value_len >= sizeof (int)); > + *(int *)*value = user->sock->addr != NULL ? 1 : 0; Shouldn't that rather be looking at what S_socket_listen does? AIUI, SO_ACCEPTCONN returns whether lis

Re: RFC: Test code for SCM_CREDS

2013-09-07 Thread Svante Signell
ping On Wed, 2013-08-28 at 11:18 +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > Hi, > > attached is a test program for SCM_CREDS support for GNU/Linux, > GNU/kFreeBSD and GNU/Hurd. With the soon to be submitted patches Hurd > works as given below. LD_PRELOAD is used for the Hurd tests. > > Options: > none: sen

Re: [PATCH] ipc: perform conditional locking while changing the port sequence number

2013-09-07 Thread Samuel Thibault
Marin Ramesa, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 19:02:09 +0200, a écrit : > I completely misunderstood the code and the simple locks. No patch is > needed and there is no real bug. Sorry if I have taken up your time. No problem: teaching something to potential contributors is already a good thing :) Samuel

Re: Hacking gnumach to track parental relationship of tasks

2013-09-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-07 14:37:03) >> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: >> >> > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-06 11:58:43) >> >> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.

Re: [PATCH] ipc: perform conditional locking while changing the port sequence number

2013-09-07 Thread Marin Ramesa
On 07.09.2013 10:46:18, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Marin Ramesa, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 10:17:29 +0200, a écrit : > > We have a local variable mqueue that is set by the lock, but if you > > look at the definition of imq_unlock() and then simple_unlock() > > members of mqueue just change state and they d

[PATCH] implement SO_ACCEPTCONN in pflocal

2013-09-07 Thread Pino Toscano
Hi, attached there is the (simple) implementation of the read-only SO_ACCEPTCONN socket option in pflocal. (pfinet could need it too, just need to dig into its Linux code more.) May I push it? Thanks, -- Pino Toscano>From 18d76905be35500afdb8ef47c1086f6376540da4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From:

Re: Hacking gnumach to track parental relationship of tasks

2013-09-07 Thread Justus Winter
Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-07 14:37:03) > Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: > > > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-06 11:58:43) > >> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: > >> > >> > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Co

Re: Hacking gnumach to track parental relationship of tasks

2013-09-07 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-06 11:58:43) >> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> skribis: >> >> > Quoting Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= (2013-09-05 18:11:43) >> >> Justus Winter <4win...@informatik.

Re: [PATCH] ipc: perform conditional locking while changing the port sequence number

2013-09-07 Thread Marin Ramesa
On 07.09.2013 10:46:18, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > And in the end mqueue never get's really used in the > > ipc_port_set_seqno(). > > It is, for locking. That's what I mean by "not functional". I claim it doesn't perform locking in that one special case. But I was too hasty with the patch, I'll

Re: [PATCH] ipc: perform conditional locking while changing the port sequence number

2013-09-07 Thread Samuel Thibault
Marin Ramesa, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 10:17:29 +0200, a écrit : > On 07.09.2013 08:58:14, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Marin Ramesa, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 08:00:47 +0200, a écrit : > > > * ipc/ipc_port.c (ipc_port_set_seqno) [MACH_SLOCKS]: Conditional > > > locking. > > > > What is the rationale? Does it r

Re: [PATCH] ipc: perform conditional locking while changing the port sequence number

2013-09-07 Thread Marin Ramesa
On 07.09.2013 08:58:14, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Marin Ramesa, le Sat 07 Sep 2013 08:00:47 +0200, a écrit : > > * ipc/ipc_port.c (ipc_port_set_seqno) [MACH_SLOCKS]: Conditional > > locking. > > What is the rationale? Does it really bring an noticeable > improvement? The locking is already conditi